Examination of Witnesses (Questions 560-577)
MR DAVID
WABOSO, MR
GILES THOMAS,
MR PAUL
PLUMBER AND
MR ANDREW
MCNAUGHTON
16 JUNE 2004
Q560 Chairman: Mr Plummer, what we want
to know is are there any benefits to be gained from international
passenger service liberalisation?
Mr Plummer: Can I comment very
briefly on the previous issue?
Q561 Chairman: Yes, very briefly?
Mr Plummer: I think these TSIs
cannot just be imposed by Europe. We work very closely with the
rest of the UK industry, we have a very coordinated approach across
the rest of the UK industry to present and develop our view of
the impact on the industry of TSIs as they are being developed.
Q562 Chairman: One would hope so, Mr
Plummer, but we still come back to the point that what we are
saying to you is: is it not more sensible to do that assessment
before we try and bring it in rather than after?
Mr Plummer: That is what I am
saying we do. So the UK industry is working together to develop
its case. It is presenting that case to Europe in the technical
discussions and in the Economic Evaluation Group before the TSIs
are finalised and imposed.
Q563 Chairman: "Finalised"!
In other words, the structure is there, we are well along. They
have been presented to you. The SRA has not done a test yet?
Mr Plummer: They are developed
very much by the European rail industries themselves and then
finalised through the European process with a vote from the Member
States as well, which brings in the Government side of it. So
it is the railway industry developing it with the Government side
of it at the end, and that includes the Department.
Q564 Chairman: I think we can conclude
Mr McNaughton has got a lot of positive work ahead of him. Are
there any real benefits to be gained from international passenger
service liberalisation?
Mr Plummer: This is primarily
a matter, I think, for ATOC and for the Strategic Rail Authority.
In terms of the impact on Network Rail, we do not see a major
problem with that.
Q565 Chairman: Does it only make commercial
sense if access charges are limited to marginal costs?
Mr Waboso: This is part of the
so-called third package area, and this is a classic area where
we are making sure that the full regulatory impact assessment
is done and the full cost benefit is proven. Currently that work
has not been done. We would only support this if that comes out
as positive.
Mr Plummer: Could I add something
on that?
Q566 Chairman: Yes.
Mr Plummer: The key point is what
is `marginal cost' in this case? Does it take account of all of
the costs in the particular case? So does it take account of the
impact on performance of the other operators and all of the other
incremental costs that running an extra service can impose? That
is an issue we have within the UK quite separately from the European
issue and is an issue that we are dealing with.
Q567 Chairman: You are debating that
yourselves before you get an agreement at European level as to
whether that should be a definition on which you all work?
Mr Plummer: Certainly we have
the issue within the UK anyway. The debate is to ensure there
is nothing inconsistent with what is happening at European level
that would cause us to do something different here.
Q568 Chairman: There are different EU
and UK approaches to improving equipment, are there not? Are we
going to be affected in the sense of comparability of the EU and
the UK safety regimes? Are we going to have confusion?
Mr Waboso: I think it is fair
to say, Madam Chairman, that the acceptance process today could
benefit from a degree of simplification, and we see the notified
body process, for example, that we spoke about earlier on, as
providing an opportunity to do that, if we do it in the right
way, and we are working very hard with industry to make sure that
when we do take on board these new processes coming out of Europe
that we do it in the right way.
Q569 Chairman: When the Railway Forum
say, "There is a danger that EU strategies promulgated by
the ERA do not mesh with those of the Strategic Rail Authority
in the United Kingdom", is that a real worry?
Mr Waboso: I think what we have
to do is to make sure that the vision and the long-term strategies
coming out of Europe are consistent with the strategies—
Q570 Chairman: So, yes, it is a real
worry?
Mr Waboso: It is something we
will have to work on.
Mr Donohoe: Technically.
Q571 Chairman: I was not clear from your
remarks about the licensing of drivers whether you were assuming
that the present talks were not realistic and there was no advantage
to us or whether you were assuming that there was so much divergence
between the various countries this was not at the moment a runner?
Which of those two is right?
Mr Thomas: I think there are advantages
to driver licensing for international drivers, possibly. That
is where the European Community have started to look. They have
also expressed an interest in doing that for domestic drivers
as well. That is where, I think, we feel that there may not be
a good argument for doing that.
Q572 Chairman: So what you are saying
is that you are prepared to look at it at international level,
but you do not think it is necessary for the bulk of drivers:
because 90% of our drivers are not international drivers, are
they?
Mr Thomas: That is an absolutely
fair summary. The only other thing I would probably add to that
is that there may be an advantage in having one system working
in the UK for all drivers. That seems to be a sensible thing to
have too.
Q573 Chairman: That would depend on the
levels and the conditions on which you decided that you were going
to standardise—
Mr Thomas: Indeed, it would.
Q574 Chairman: —conditions, would
it not, and we are not at that point yet?
Mr Thomas: No.
Q575 Chairman: Just on mandatory quality
standards for freight contracts, are they going to effect the
operation of rail freight services in the United Kingdom?
Mr Waboso: If it goes ahead as
currently promulgated, yes, and we do not agree with it, we do
not think it is correct, we do not think it is right.
Q576 Chairman: I think you have made
that very clear?
Mr Waboso: Yes.
Q577 Chairman: What about the effect
on freight operators passing on to the infrastructure provider
the liability for compensation in case of delay?
Mr Plummer: We are also concerned
about that and making our views very clear on it.
Chairman: Gentleman, you have been very
helpful. Thank you very much indeed for coming. Next time let
us have a little equal opportunities, shall we? It is like this
Committee, where the women are very put upon!
| 
